CHETAN DOSHI,MUMBAI vs. ASST. COMMR. OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 45, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1615/MUM/2011Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 January 2016AY 2007-082 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal confirmed the order of the CIT(A) as the assessee failed to provide satisfactory explanations for unexplained cash, credit, and jewellery additions. No material was placed before the Tribunal to warrant interference.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was against the order of the CIT(A) for AY 2007-08. The assessee failed to appear before the Tribunal despite notices.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the validity of additions made by the Assessing Officer on account of unexplained cash, credit, and jewellery, and the assessee's failure to substantiate these.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH, MUMBAI

Hearing: 30.12.2015

स्थधमी रेखध सं./जीआइआय सं./PAN. :AEDPD1404J अऩीरधथी ओय से / Appellant by None प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Respondent by Shri Daya Sagar सुनवधई की तधयीख / Date of Hearing : 30.12.2015 घोषणध की तधयीख /Date of Pronouncement: 1. 1.2016 आदेश / O R D E R

Per B R Baskaran, AM:

1.

The appeal of the assessee is directed against the order dated 30.11.2010 passed by Ld CIT(A)-36, Mumbai and it relates to the assessment year 2007-08. None appeared on behalf of the assessee even though the notice of hearing was sent to the assessee by RPAD on more than one occasion. Hence, we proceed to dispose of the appeal ex-parte, without the presence of the assessee.

2.

We heard Ld D.R and perused the record. We notice that the assessing officer has made additions on account of unexplained cash, unexplained credit in the books and unexplained jewellery. We notice that the assessee has failed to prove the sources of them to the satisfaction of the assessing officer and hence the above said additions were made. Before Ld CIT(A) also, the assessee has failed to furnish the details and hence the first appellate authority has sustained the additions. Before us, no material was placed to compel us to interfere with the view taken by the Ld CIT(A). Under these circumstances, we have no other option but to confirm the order of the Ld CIT(A).

3.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →